Plus: Democrats divided on deficit-neutral spending and an autopsy of The Weekly Standard.

"Does anyone have any doubt that we're not doing a wall?" Votes in the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday cleared the way for Nancy Pelosi to resume her leadership role on Capitol Hill, for headscarves to be worn on the House floor, and for the creation of a select committee on climate change.

As expected, Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) was crowned speaker in the newly Democrat-controlled House. According to the White House, she and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) will meet with President Donald Trump again today to plot an end to the partial shutdown of the federal government that's been going on for the past two weeks. But how any agreement will come about is unclear.

Trump reiterated yesterday that he won't approve any funding deal that doesn't include $5 billion for his border wall.

Pelosi, meanwhile, told reporters yesterday that "we're not doing a wall. Does anyone have any doubt that we're not doing a wall?"

The House yesterday did pass a temporary funding package. It "includes a bill to temporarily fund the Department of Homeland Security at current levels—with $1.3 billion for border security, far less than Trump has said he wants—through Feb. 8 as bipartisan talks would continue," reportsBusiness Insider. It was approved along with a measure to continue funding the Agriculture, Interior, and Housing and Urban Development departments through September.

But not all Democrats dug the package—Reps. Ro Khanna (D–Calif.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (D–N.Y.), and Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) all voted against it out of opposition to "PAYGO" rules requiring spending increases to be deficit-neutral. And the White House has promised to reject the agreement, while Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refuses to put it up for a vote there.

Despite this delayed dealmaking, many Democrats rejoiced yesterday as new members of the 116th Congress were sworn in. This Congress features a record number of women lawmakers (127, including 25 in the Senate and 102 in the House), as well as an array of identity-category firsts. The House will see its first Native American female members—Deb Haaland (D–N.M.) and Sharice Davids (D–Kansas)—along with a new youngest member (Ocasio-Cortez) and the first Muslim women (Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota). Tlaib was sworn in yesterday on Thomas Jefferson's copy of the Quran.

Some are saying that Tlaib is also the first Palestinian member of Congress, but Michigan Republican Justin Amash points out that this isn't so:

FREE MARKETS

What killed The Weekly Standard? Following last month's shuttering of the influential neocon magazine founded by Bill Kristol, The New Yorker offers an autopsy. "In the press, the magazine's demise was a media story, confined to the inside pages and told in a tone of half-sympathetic reminiscence," notes Benjamin Wallace-Wells. "But the death of the major intellectual journal of conservatism, at a time of profound transition for the right, is about more than the strategic calculations of a media holding company in Denver." More:

The decisive turn in conservatism during the half decade when the Standard shed subscribers and, eventually, its owners' faith, was toward Trumpism, an evolution that the Standard opposed so vociferously that for a long time it has been hard to separate Bill Kristol's public persona from the anti-Trump cause. (As the 2016 Republican Convention neared, Kristol had frantically tried to recruit a challenger to Trump, a somewhat quixotic effort in which he was turned down by James Mattis, Mitt Romney, and eventually a National Review columnist named David French.) The division over the President among conservative élites has been especially sharp of late, as Mattis and Nikki Haley, favorites among Washington conservatives, left the administration, and Romney published an op-ed attacking the President two days before assuming his Senate seat. The Standard's sources, friends, and sensibility were on one side of this divide. Many of its subscribers, fatally, were on the other....

A magazine like the Standard depends upon social currency of at least two kinds. One is inside Washington, a prestige that guarantees both its influence in Republican administrations and congressional offices and its access to important sources. The Standard never really lost this currency, despite its rift with the President. The final issue's cover story was a friendly interview with Haley, who seems as likely as anyone to lead the Republican Party after Trump. But, for the magazine to thrive, it required a broader brand, too. For years, to name-check the Standard was to project a certain image: that you were conservative without being brutish or anti-modern, that you had some ecumenicism and intellectual style. That kind of currency filtered back to Colorado, where some of Anschutz's executives at Clarity Media moved in Republican donor circles. "Whenever Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or Cory Gardner would go through Colorado and have an event, they would say, 'Oh, you guys own the Standard! It's great,' and they liked being part of that," the senior Standard editor told me. The aura it cast was not unlike the one supplied by The Economist—name-drop it in a mundane setting and it suggested that you had access to a broader and more imaginative world.

Conservatives and the left are increasingly polarizing around completely different notions of power, with conservatives attempting to lap up many outraged by hierarchies of cultural and social capital. "AOC can't speak for the oppressed because she is POPULAR AMPERSAND PRETTY!1!"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

"Conservatives and the left are increasingly polarizing around completely different notions of power, with conservatives attempting to lap up many outraged by hierarchies of cultural and social capital. "AOC can't speak for the oppressed because she is POPULAR & PRETTY!1!"

No Willy. Because she's an illiterate, illiberal ignoramus that's why.

So progressive to be proud of judging people by the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. But then, I'm a straight white middle-class male so I have nothing to be proud of and everything to be ashamed of.

So progressive to be proud of judging people by the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. But then, I'm a straight white middle-class male so I have nothing to be proud of and everything to be ashamed of.

Identity politics is everything presently, which is sad to me because America used to be proud of being a societal "melting pot." Well, we used to say we were proud of it. Whether we actually meant it is up for debate. Even so, it is interesting how you've chosen to self-identify in your comment and set yourself apart from others, Jerry. We could argue what that says about *your* character.

BILL KRISTOL SAYS 'LAZY' WHITE WORKING CLASS SHOULD BE REPLACED BY 'NEW AMERICANS'
"Look, to be totally honest, if things are so bad as you say with the white working class, don't you want to get new Americans in?" Kristol told author Charles Murray during an event hosted by the American Enterprise Institute titled "It Came Apart: What's Next for a Fractured Culture." Murray recently wrote a book, entitled "Coming Apart," which focuses on the cultural separation between the wealthiest and most educated white Americans and the poorest and least educated white Americans.

Before delving into his theory about replacing the white working class, Kristol said that he hopes "this thing isn't being videotaped or ever shown anywhere. Whatever tiny, pathetic future I have is going to totally collapse."

I've read so many Palin's Buttplug posts in which he informed me that the wealthier people are, the more likely they are to vote Democrat. And I've read so many Rev. Kirkland posts in which he insists Drumpf voters are all poor losers, bitter at their own failure to compete with more successful Clinton voters. There's no way my left-libertarian allies have been misleading me this whole time.

Just as I avid establishments which brag about their fish association, or their gay association, or their military background, or their political association, or their education achievements (adding "PhD" to your signature impresses me in ways you do not want), or any other attribute beyond what the establishment purports to sell, so do I avoid movies which brag about things unrelated to entertainment. I watch movies which entertain me, or educate me, not which preach to me.

It's especially bizarre that the very ones they want to reach with their preaching are the ones they insult with their preaching.

'HITLER SOMETIMES TAKES A NAP' AND OTHER NEW YORK TIMES INSIGHTS
In 1939, with the Nuremberg Laws and Kristallnacht matters of public record, the Dachau and Buchenwald concentration camps in operation, and German Jews disenfranchised and dispossessed of their properties, The New York Times Magazine published a detailed piece about Adolf Hitler.

"Hitler sometimes takes a nap," it explained.

But rest assured, the newspaper dug deeper: "Hitler can be a good listener." "Hitler is able to talk well as host." "Hitler likes an after-breakfast stroll on his mountain." "Hitler frequently has tea up here." "The Fuehrer does not always take his meals in company." "He likes well-cooked dishes," he "makes no secret of being fond of chocolate," he "walks little, but vigorously," and he "is fond of his climb above the clouds."

The terrifying transition of the GOP away from the control of the patriotic, respectable neoconservatives. That's what killed The Weekly Standard. People like David Frum, Bill Kristol, and Max Boot are clearly preferable to the alt-right white nationalist Handmaid's Tale faction that has taken over the Republican Party.

"The decisive turn in conservatism during the half decade when the Standard shed subscribers and, eventually, its owners' faith, was toward Trumpism"

The neocons hardly enjoyed any recognition or support before 9/11. After 9/11, they were seen as the leading reaction to terrorism. As the country's obsession with terrorism faded, so did support for neoconservatives.

Average conservatives now talk about Iraq as a mistake. That isn't because of Trump. That's because 15 years later, the country is still a mess. The neoconservatives were wrong about pretty much everything.

That isn't about Trump. That isn't about Trumpism, whatever "Trumpism" means. That's about neoconservative failures in foreign policy. Blaming Trump for the failure of neoconservatism is like blaming Yeltsin for the failures of central planning.

NDT is possibly the greatest living scientist, and white supremacists cannot stand that fact. So they orchestrated a smear campaign built around the otherwise quite valid #MeToo movement in order to ruin his career. Absolutely disgusting.

"Hester Peirce, a Republican member of the Securities and Exchange Commission with libertarian leanings, has made waves with a number of contrarian positions since joining the agency last January. She has drawn attention for frequent votes against enforcement actions.

. . . .

Ms. Peirce, who doesn't have children, has embraced her new nickname and recently told a group in San Francisco that she would be a "free-range mother," while the SEC was a "helicopter mom" trying to protect the population from investments that look too exotic or risky.

. . . .

Behind closed doors, Ms. Peirce has sometimes questioned the SEC's enforcement attorneys so aggressively that she later apologized for remarks that could be seen as denigrating their work

. . . .

Ms. Peirce, 48 years old, grew up in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, where her father was an economics professor at Case Western Reserve University. He ran unsuccessfully for governor of Ohio on the libertarian ticket in 2006.

A friend of a friend did a year in federal prison for insider trading. She was a secretary at some law firm in New York and bought less than $10,000 stock based on inside information. The big bad SEC is out there protecting us from secretaries making a few thousand dollars trading stocks. And insider trading is such a heinous crime, Congress is exempt from the prohibition against it. Kill the entire agency with fire.

The Greatest-Ever Act of Tax Avoidance?
Jeanne Calment's apparent longevity turned her into a global celebrity before she died at the age of 122 years and 164 days in 1997. However, that age is being challenged… Yuri Deigin, a genealogist, claims that Mrs Calment actually died in 1934 and that her daughter, Yvonne, usurped her identity… The genealogist said that Mrs Calment, born in 1875, and Fernand, her husband, were the joint owners of a department store in Arles, in Provence. If Mrs Calment's death had been registered, Mr Calment would have had to pay inheritance tax of up to 38 per cent on his wife's half of the business. …Mr Deigin said that Mr Calment avoided the bill by telling officials that it was his daughter who had died. The daughter then passed herself off as her mother for the rest of her life.

But a clear example of why we need national identity cards with infallible bio-metric features. Each citizen should have to present themselves in person to a tax collector once each year to confirm they are alive. As a plus the cards could serve as both voter id cards and concealed carry permits.

"New Democratic congresswoman says "impeach the motherfucker" in video: Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Michigan Democrat who just began her first term, has generated headlines after a video showed her using an expletive as she pledged to impeach President Donald Trump."https://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-
democratic-congresswoman-on-trump-
impeach-the-motherf----r-senate-
republicans-will-end-shutdown-says-
budget-expert-2019-01-04

Here's where I'll agree with Ken, I think. Nobody is making the demand for people to be anti-racist, a certain set of people is demanding people be explicitly racist. The demand is that every issue be specifically viewed through a lens of race and making decisions based on that view.

Anti-racism would be eschewing the use of race-based identities completely. That is what would lead to a less fractured society. There is no need to be "actively" anti-racist in this scenario.

"What you describe would be just being neutral towards race. I think the article is more describing being actively hostile towards racism."

Being irrational on race doesn't appear to be what he means by racism--but that's giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Another explanation would be that he thinks racism can be rational and so he believes the test of rationality is insufficiently antiracist.

I suppose it's necessary to say around here that chemjeff seems to believe this shit regardless of whether he realizes it; i.e., they're the most likely explanations for his rationalizations regardless of whether he realizes their implications.

Yes, Ken, I do think that there are some limited circumstances in which racism may be considered rational.

I also think, Ken, that simply being "rational" isn't sufficient to define a libertarian. There is no requirement that libertarians have to be Vulcans. We are the ones who demand the right to do irrational things, like smoke pot all day!

I'm not even sure what your point is, other than just to attack me because you perceive me as an other.

Here is the classic example. You are walking down the street and you see three black male teenage youths loitering on the sidewalk in front of you. Do you continue walking, or do you cross the street? One can make the perfectly rational argument that, based on statistical probabilities about crime victimization, it is better to cross the street than to keep walking. (Of course most people who do cross the street probably wouldn't make this a priori calculation, they would cross the street and then use the statistical argument as a post-hoc rationalization.) That wouldn't be a very libertarian thing to do, however, because that would be judging individuals by their skin color and group associations. "Rational" does not necessarily mean "correct", it just means "based on logic". And what I described above would be a logical approach to the situation, even though it is un-libertarian.

libertarians have a duty to be rational

I don't agree at all. If that were the case, why would libertarians advocate for the right to smoke pot all day? Wouldn't that be an irrational way to spend one's day?

I think the article is more describing being actively hostile towards racism.

Yes, I understand. The article isn't pushing people to not be racist, it's pushing people to go out of their way to let everyone else know exactly how not racist they are. In a truly civilized society, that wouldn't even be necessary. The fact that this person is trying to get others to be more active about it is just further proof that people are incapable of understanding unless beat over the head regularly and repeatedly.

it's pushing people to go out of their way to let everyone else know exactly how not racist they are.

I don't read it that way. I don't read it as the article's author demanding that libertarians be pushy and irritating with their anti-racist virtue signaling. I see it instead as simply doing more than just being neutral on race. As the author writes, "A good world and a desirable world needs more than non-violence.". And I happen to agree with that.

According to the Chron, putting returning that re-tread as speaker is 'historic'. It might well be:

"Confused Pelosi botches Speaker speech: 'I think I skipped a couple of pages. I'm not sure.'"
[...]
"At the conclusion of her first speech to Congress after becoming House Speaker again, Nancy Pelosi realized she "skipped a couple pages" of her remarks.
"As we take the oath of office today," Pelosi said, "we accept responsibility as daunting and demanding as any previous generations of leadership have faced.
"Guided by the vision and values of our Founders, the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform," she continued, "and the aspirations that we have for our children, let us meet that responsibility with wisdom, with courage, and with grace."
Concluding moments later: "God bless you all and God bless the United States of America."
Then she announced to herself, "I think I skipped a couple pages. I'm not sure," on a hot mic."http://www.theamericanmirror.com/
confused-pelosi-botches-speaker-
speech-i-think-i-skipped-a-couple
-of-pages-im-not-sure/

Whoever was holding her upright with that stick up her ass needs the assistance of someone to read her lines for her.

I was getting ready to build myself a new dream machine--especially focused on privacy, but also allowing me to boot AutoCAD from Windows 7 on the same box. I kept putting it off and putting it off until after the holidays, when I'd have free time. Now I'm finding that my dream box may no longer be viable in the future--if present trends continue.

Fedora wasn't my first choice already, and now Red Hat is being bought by IBM. I don't care what Fedora enthusiasts say, that acquisition is about cloud services, not maintaining a robust environment for workstations. Ubuntu 18.04 would have been my first choice, but Canonical complicates things with rules about installers--Qubes won't take an 18.04 template without serious tweaking and after doing that, your system is . . . tweaked.

Meanwhile, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft aren't likely to be thrilled with using rival IBM's Red Hat products for their own competing cloud services. Chances are they're already kicking the tires to buy Ubuntu and SUSE. Where's that leave Qubes--with Debian? Windows 7 support is disappearing in less than a year, and Microsoft hasn't released the necessary requirements for Windows 10 (or 8.) to operate with Xen (Qubes).

Moreover, where does that leave Linux? Where does that leave privacy for consumers if Fedora, Ubuntu, and SUSE are owned by the likes of Amazon, Microsoft, and Google?

To quote The Subhumans, "A choice of three is not democracy, when they're all parasites".

It's a photo op. A picture is worth a thousand words. And all one thousand of the words in that picture are about how the Democratic Party is all about women and how women should unite against Bubba Trump.

The Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics said on Friday the economy added an impressivve 312,000 jobs in December, which was a month of strong retail sales; and the nation's unemployment rate increased two-tenths of a point to 3.9 percent, which is still an 18-year low.

And it gets better

In another positive sign, the labor force participation rate increased two-tenths of a point to 63.1 percent, the highest it's been since Trump took office.

In December, the nation's civilian noninstitutionalized population, consisting of all people age 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution, reached 258,888,000. Of those, 163,240,000 participated in the labor force by either holding a job or actively seeking one.

The 163,240,000 who participated in the labor force equaled 63.1 percent of the 258,888,000 civilian noninstitutionalized population. The participation rate has showed little change since Trump took office. The highest it's ever been is 67.3 percent in the year 2000.

Yeah, the unemployment rate going up two-tenths of a point is about more people leaving the couch and looking for work--and wages are rising, too. It's really good news, especially with China's consumers doing so poorly as evidenced by iPhone sales.

Trump needs some coaching on how to let people "save face" right about now. He needs to help Xi find a way to pretend he won. He needs to let Pelosi find a way to pretend she won. I'm not sure he's got that bone in his body.

He wants to spike the ball and dance in the end zone, but I'm not sure he's going to get into the end zone unless he lets his opponents leave the field in a dignified way. Neither Pelosi nor Xi will ever admit they were wrong--certainly not in public.

The problem for legalized sellers of weed is that getting bad weed won't kill you. If they ever legalize harder drugs, people will be willing to pay a lot extra in taxes to purchase them legally and have the assurance that they are what they claim to be and won't kill you. But, the stakes for getting bad weed is a headache. And weed is a weed and can be grown by virtually anyone. So, buying it legally doesn't provide much of a premium.

Poorly made moonshine can kill you too. Booze makers really do provide something worth paying the taxes for. But, I honestly can't see what legal pot stores provide that would justify paying anything more than a nominal tax.

The shutdown and lack of a wall / fence / barrier is entirely on Harry Reid. One ruling from him and the house passed bill goes through with 51 votes or more, and all is well.
Nancy does not matter, Trump does not matter (other than being who he is), nothing else matters. One man stands in the way.